Are we really full-up?

The United Kingdom is the 53rd most densely populated country or dependency in the world. Since this list has 241 entries we can safely say that the UK is in the top quarter of the most densely populated places.

However, a look at who is first (Macao) and last (Greenland) will show that our position when ignoring what are city or small island states gives a different position, and is a fairer comparison.

The following list (at the foot of this post) only includes those countries or dependencies with an area in excess of a thousand square miles.

England is the most densely populated of the four parts of the UK, and is eighth in the list of the larger places, beaten in Europe only by the Netherlands.

However desirable (or not) it would be to have more people living in the UK, the argument that we are full up is demonstrably untrue – unless you can win the argument that other place are more than full-up.

The world’s population is growing, partly a feature of birth rate and partly a feature of better healthcare. Predictions are that later in this century the growth will peak. To stop growth in the UK now would either require large-scale repatriation, or a cull.

In the meantime, the best form of birth control appears to be money – declining birth rates are a feature of wealthy nations.

Like this:

Related

2 Responses to Are we really full-up?

However desirable (or not) it would be to have more people living in the UK, the argument that we are full up is demonstrably untrue – unless you can win the argument that other place are more than full-up.

Agreed, but, being “full up” is no longer merely an issue of “number of people”. Pre-globalisation it may have been something to do with the balance of population and the resources (food, water, fuel) necessary to sustain that population.

It is no longer shortages of the traditional resources (food, water, fuel) that are the causes of the “full up” claims. It is the availability of quality employment and essential services (education, health, housing) that are the most quoted problems. This is not purely a function of the number of people in a region but of the willingness of government to do anything about the situation.

1) To seriously address the high level issues that maintain regional economic and power inequalities – particularly in the availability of high quality secure work.
2) Be willing to provide public services to match the population and to promote a housing policy that means that the availability of reasonable quality affordable housing to let and buy matches the population.

But if you have a laissez-faire government that believes in minimum intervention and a small state with “the market providing”, you will get imbalances and a failure to ensure employment and services. But that is not because the country is “full up” it’s because the country (i.e. us) won’t or can’t do anything about inequalities in the provision of employment and services.